Mediaboss Marketing

Over the short span of just 300 years, since the invention of modern physics, we have gained a deeper understanding of how our universe works on both small and large scales. Yet, physics is still very young and when it comes to using it to explain life, physicists struggle.

Even today, we cant really explain what the difference is between a living lump of matter and a dead one. But my colleagues and I are creating a new physics of life that might soon provide answers.

More than 150 years ago, Darwin poignantly noted the dichotomy between what we understand in physics and what we observe in lifenoting at the end of The Origin of Species whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been and are being evolved.

Isaac Newton described a universe where the laws never change, and time is an immutable and absolute backdrop against which everything moves. Darwin, however, observed a universe where endless forms are generated, each changing features of what came before, suggesting that time should not only have a direction, but that it in some ways folds back on itself. New evolutionary forms can only arise via selection on the past.

Presumably these two areas of science are describing the same universe, but how can two such diametrically opposite views be unified? The key to understanding why life is not explainable in current physics may be to reconsider our notions of time as the key difference between the universe as described by Newton and that of Darwin. Time has, in fact, been reinvented many times through the history of physics.

Although Newtons time was fixed and absolute, Einsteins time became a dimensionjust like space. And just as all points in space exist all at once, so do all points in time. This philosophy of time is sometimes referred to as the block universe where the past, present, and future are equally real and exist in a static structurewith no special now. In quantum mechanics, the passage of time emerges from how quantum states change from one to the next.

The invention of thermodynamics gave time its arrow, explaining why its moving forward rather than backwards. Thats because there are clear examples of systems in our universe, such as a working engine, that are irreversibleonly working in one direction. Each new area of fundamental physics, whether describing space and time (Newton/Einstein), matter and light (quantum mechanics), or heat and work (thermodynamics) has introduced a new concept of time.

But what about evolution and life? To build novel things, evolution requires time. Endless novelty can only come to be in a universe where time exists and has a clear direction. Evolution is the only physical process in our universe that can generate the succession of novel objects we associate to lifethings like microbes, mammals, trees, and even cellphones.

Such objects cannot fluctuate into existence spontaneously. They require a memory, based on what existed in the past, to construct things in the present. It is such selection that determines the dividing line between the universe described by current physics and what Darwin saw: it is the mechanism that turns a universe where memory does not matter in determining what exists, to one where it does.

Think about it, everything in the living world requires some kind of memory and information flow. The DNA in our cells is our blueprint. And to invent new things, such as rockets or medication, living beings also need informationknowledge of the laws of physics and chemistry.

To explain life, we therefore need to understand how the complex objects life creates exist in time. With my collaborators, we have been doing just that in a newly proposed theory of physics called assembly theory.

A key conjecture of assembly theory is that, as objects become more complex, the number of unique parts that make it up increases, and so does the need for local memory to store how to assemble the object from its unique parts. We quantify this in assembly theory as the shortest number of physical steps to build an object from its elementary building blocks, called the assembly index.

Importantly, assembly theory treats this shortest path as an intrinsic property of the object, and indeed we have shown how an assembly index can be measured for molecules using several different measuring techniques including mass spectrometry (an analytical method to measure the mass-to-charge ratio of molecules).

With this approach, we have shown in the lab, with measurements on both biological and non-biological samples, how molecules with an assembly index above 15 steps are only found in living samples.

This suggests that assembly theory is indeed capable of testing our hypothesis that life is the only physics that generates complex objects. And we can do so by identifying those objects that are so complex the only physical mechanism to form them is evolution.

We are aiming to use our theory to estimate when the origin if life happens by measuring the point at which molecules in a chemical soup become so complex that they start using information to make copies of themselvesthe threshold at which life arises from non-life. We may then apply the theory to experiments aiming to generate a new origin of life event in the lab.

And when we know this, we can use the theory to look for life on worlds that are radically different to Earth, and may therefore look so alien that we wouldnt recognize life there.

If the theory holds, it will force a radical rethink on time in physics. According to our theory, assembly can be measured as an intrinsic property for molecules, which corresponds to their size in timemeaning time is a physical attribute.

Ultimately, time is intrinsic to our experiences of the world, and it is necessary for evolution to happen. If we want physics to be capable of explaining lifeand usit may be that we need to treat time as a material property for the first time in physics.

This is perhaps the most radical departure for physics of life from standard physics, but it may be the critical insight needed to explain what life is.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Image Credit: Zdenk Machek / Unsplash

Read more from the original source:

Modern Physics Can't Explain LifeBut a New Theory, Which Says ... - Singularity Hub

Warning! Spoilers ahead for Superman: Lost #2Everything fans thought they knew about the source of Superman's powers has just changed. When explaining how he survived an impossible feat, the Man of Steel reveals a hidden aspect that plays a significant role in how his abilities work.

In Superman: Lost #2 by Christopher Priest and Carlo Pagulayan, Clark Kent is still adjusting to normal life on Earth after he'd been lost in space for twenty years. Superman finally opens up to Lois about what happened after he traveled through a quantum singularity. The hero was thrown into another part of the universe where he's saved from the vacuum of space by a group of travelers.

The travelers are skeptical that Clark could seriously survive something as punishing as a singularity, but Superman informs them that Kryptonians have various biochemical reactions to gravity that are enhanced when exposed to solar radiation. After telling his story, Clark is ditched on an alien planet for not being able to pay his rescuers for a ride home. The planet is covered with smog and has a much different level of gravity, forcing Superman to relearn his most basic powers.

Any Superman fan worth their salt knows that the yellow rays of Earth's sun allow him to fly, use heat vision, and pull off the hundreds of amazing feats he's capable of. For most of his superhero career, Clark's powers have depended on what kind of solar radiation he's exposed to. Powerful yellow rays bring out his unique abilities, while weaker red radiation brings him down to a more human level. Superman's powers have even exponentially increased when exposed to a younger blue or white sun.

And while Superman says that solar radiation plays a considerable part his how his powers act, Clark implies that the real root of his abilities is the gravity he experiences. In the past, Clark has described himself as a living battery that constantly absorbs sunlight which fuels his powers. But now Clark says planet's gravity determines what he can do. While it's a minor change, it does raise the question of how Clark's powers could change on a plant with different gravity compared to Earth's.

If Clark's powers are rooted in how his body reacts to gravity, then it stands to reason that a world with a stronger or weaker force could affect his powers. Of course, even Clark says that "a thousand variables" are at play regarding his abilities, including sunlight. So what happens when he's on a planet like Earth with similar amounts of a yellow sun but a weaker gravity? Does Superman become faster? And does he get stronger or more durable with harsher gravity? There are a lot of questions that come up with this new insight into Superman's powers and what it could mean for the hero going forward. Fans can see Clark explain how his abilities really work in Superman: Lost #2, on sale now.

See original here:

Superman Explains the Real Source of His Powers (Not Sunlight) - Screen Rant

Tesla and Twitter CEO Elon Musk warned Monday of the potential pitfalls of groundbreaking artificial intelligence (AI) technology, telling "Tucker Carlson Tonight" that while he has butted heads with regulators in the past, this new frontier can be potentially dangerous if there aren't boundaries or guidelines.

Musk recounted working with Google co-founder Larry Page years back on artificial intelligence, saying he would warn Page about the importance of AI "safety."

He also stated how humans' edge on their primate cousins are that while chimpanzees are more agile and stronger, homosapiens are smarter. In that regard, AI would top humanity in its most prolific category, he warned.

"Now what happens when something vastly smarter than the smartest person comes along in silicon form? It's very difficult to predict what will happen in that circumstance," he said.

IT PRESUMES TO REPLACE US: CONCERNS ABOUT AI BIAS GROW AS MUSK ISSUES NEW WARNING

"It's called the singularity. It's a singularity like a black hole, because you don't know what happens after that. It's hard to predict. So I think we should be cautious with A.I., and I think there should be some government oversight because it is a danger to the public."

In the same way the government is tasked, via the FDA and USDA, to safeguard food and drug consumption or the FAA for airborne entities so should there be parameters for artificial intelligence.

Musk said he has been a longtime advocate of strong but sensible regulation, so that companies don't cut corners on safety and get people hurt.

"It's not fun to be regulated. It's sort of arduous to be regulated. I have a lot of experience with very good regulated industries because obviously automotive is highly regulated. You can fill this room with all the regulations that are required for a production car just in the United States."

ELON MUSK TO DEVELOP TRUTHGPT; WARNS OF CIVILIZATIONAL DESTRUCTION FROM AI

"And same thing is true with rockets. You can't just willy-nilly shoot rockets off. Not big ones anyway because the FAA oversees that. And then even to get a launch license, there are probably half a dozen or more federal agencies that need to approve it, plus state agencies," Musk went on.

He said that despite claims of being a "regulatory maverick" that can "defy" regulators with every new industry he builds or joins, it is realistically not the case.

ELON MUSK SITS WITH TUCKER FOR TWO PART EVENT

Musk proposed the formation of an agency that would begin by crowdsourcing regulatory proposals from the AI industry and draft rules that would be accepted by the leading figures and companies.

CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"I think we have a better chance of advanced A.I. being beneficial to humanity in that circumstance," he said.

Musk envisioned how a "superintelligent" AI entity could begin influencing public opinion on a certain topic in a negative or flawed way, with the populace unable to discern its destructive conclusion.

View post:

Musk on AI regulation: 'It's not fun to be regulated' but artificial intelligence may need it - Fox News

Ray Kurzweil, a former Google engineer who has an 86 pc success rate out of his 147 predictions has created a sensation by his assertion that advances in technology will quickly lead to age-reversing nanobots and humans will achieve immortality by 2030, writes Bharat Hiteshi

In Hindu mythology, whenever an asura asks for immortality, Brahma tells them that they can have whatever they wish except that. The clever asura then asks for a boon that will render him immortal for all practical purposes. But, embedded in the boon is a loophole, a vulnerability that the devas take advantage of, to kill him. Thus, we are reminded that no one is immortal in the world.

However, Ray Kurzweil, a former Google engineer who has an 86 percent success rate out of his 147 predictions has created a sensation by his assertion that advances in technology will quickly lead to age-reversing nanobots and humans will achieve immortality in next eight years or by 2030. To add to the prediction,a prominent futurist Dr Ian Pearsonhas predicted that human intelligence, memory or senses could be connected to external technology.Credentials of the two are so plausible that it is difficult to raise a needle of suspicion, whileRay Kurzweilis the same computer scientist and former Google engineer who in 1999 received the National Medal of Technology,Dr Ian Pearsonsinventions include text messaging and active contact lens.

The idea of uploading your mind to a computer has been theorised for many years now, but it has mostly remained the stuff of science fiction. Nectome, a US-based start-up, is trying to change that by devising a way to preserve the human brain so that its memories can be uploaded to the cloud. The firm has figured out a way to preserve the human brain in microscopic detail using a high-tech embalming process, according to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT} Technology Review.

Compiling the observations in UKs MailOnline on April 8, 2023, Fiona Jackson wrote Could you live forever? Experts claim humans could achieve immortality by 2030 and one futurist even says we shall be able to attend our own funerals in a new body by reanimating the brain and uploading our minds to the cloud. However, in order for the technology to work, participants have to be willing to be euthanized. However, the prestigious institution claimed the technology is in its infancy and there is no guarantee that they can recreate consciousness.

The prominent futurist Dr Ian Pearsonhad predicted that human intelligence, memory or senses could be connected to external technology.Dr Ian Pearsonruns Futurizon, a futures institute.He claims85% proven accuracy when looking 1015 years ahead. His inventions include text messaging and active contact lens. He is a Maths and Physics graduate, a Doctor of Science, and has worked in numerous branches of engineering, from aeronautics and weapons design to cybernetics, sustainable transport to electronic cosmetics.

Rather than creating a backed up copy of your mind, most of your intelligence would simply be running from a place outside of your physical brain. In a blog post, he wrote: One day, your body dies and with it your brain stops. But no big problem, because 99 per cent of your mind is still fine, running happily on IT, in the clouds.Assuming you saved enough and prepared well, you connect to an android to use as your body from now on, attend your funeral, and then carry on as before, still you, just with a younger, highly upgraded body.

In the past,Ray Kurzweils predictions have become accurate, inspiring a cult following among other future-thinkers. While many of his predictions have come true, a claim made by Kurzweil in his 2005 book The Singularity Is Near has resurfaced online after YouTube channel Adagio shared a two-part clip, sharing insights from the book. The comments made by Kurzweil has kickstarted a debate on social media on immortality and if at all, humans will achieve it.

In his book, the scientist predicted that technology will allow humans to enjoy an everlasting life by 2030. He also talked about genetics, nanotechnology, robotics and more.2029 is the consistent date I have predicted for when an AI will pass a valid Turing test and therefore achieve human levels of intelligence. I have set the date 2045 for the Singularity which is when we will multiply our effective intelligence a billion fold by merging with the intelligence we have created, Kurzweil had toldFuturismin 2017, as quoted byNew York Post.

Kurzweil talked about nanotechnology and robotics which he believes will give birth to age-reversing nanobots. As per former Google engineer, these tiny robots will constantly keep fixing damaged cells and tissues that start to deteriorate as we age, making us immune to lethal diseases.

Past predictions coming true

This isnt the first time that this scientist has made a prediction. In 1990, Kurzweil had predicted that the worlds best chess player would lose to a computer by 2000. The prediction came true in 1997when Deep Blue beat Gary Kasparov.

Later in 1999, he madeanother prediction stating that by 2023, a laptop worth $1,000 would have storage capacity and capabilities of a human brain. Kurzweil, an author who calls himself a futurist, had also predicted that by 2010, most of the world would have access to high-bandwidth wireless internet.

By 2029, computers will have human-level intelligence, Kurzweil had said in an interview with SXSW. Coming back to 2023, Silicon Valley is witnessing a tough battle between top tech giants as they race towardsartificial intelligence and how it can be incorporated in everyday life.

Is AI smarter than humans?

In laymans terms, singularity is a hypothetical future point in time when all the advances in technology, particularly in artificial intelligence (AI), lead to the rise of machines that are smarter than humans. Kurzweil isnt the only man who has talked about singularity. Softbank CEO Masayoshi Son in the past has also predicted the dawn of super-intelligent machines by 2047.

Thirty years from now, they (cyborgs) are going to learn by themselves, they are maybe going to laugh at you and us, the tech mogul Son had said at the Future Investment Initiative in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia in 2017. Softbank Robotics already has Pepper, a semi-humanoid robot which is designed with the ability to read emotions. It was introduced in June 2014 at a conference and was later showcased in SoftBank Mobile Phone stores in Japan.

Its just been a few months in 2023 and we have already seen big techs such as Google and Microsoft introduce their respective AI-powered chatbots, which has also resulted in fear about the future and an alarming question: Is humankind really ready for AI?

See more here:

Could humans live forever and be immortal? - Tehelka

Finding life on other planets might well be the holy grail of astronomy, but the hunt for suitable host planets that can sustain life is a resource-intensive task.

The search for exoplanets (planets outside our solar system) involves competing for time on Earths biggest telescopesyet the hit rate of this search can be disappointingly low.

In a new study recently published in Science, my colleagues and I combined different search techniques to discover a new giant planet. It could change the way we try to image planets in the future.

To satisfy our curiosity about our place in the universe, astronomers have developed many techniques to search for planets orbiting other stars. Perhaps the simplest of these is called direct imaging. But its not easy.

Direct imaging involves attaching a powerful camera to a large telescope and trying to detect light emitted, or reflected, from a planet. Stars are bright, and planets are dim, so its akin to searching for fireflies dancing around a spotlight.

Its no surprise only about 20 planets have been found with this technique to date.

Yet direct imaging is of great value. It helps shed light on a planets atmospheric properties, such as its temperature and composition, in a way other detection techniques cant.

Our direct imaging of a new planet, named HIP99770b, reveals a hot, giant and moderately cloudy planet. It orbits its star at a distance that falls somewhere between the orbital distances of Saturn and Uranus around our sun.

The HIP99770 star is almost 14 times brighter than the sun. But since its planet has an orbit larger than Saturns, the planet receives a similar amount of energy as Jupiter does from the sun. Author provided

With about 15 times the mass of Jupiter, HIP99770b is a real giant. However, its also more than 1,000, so its not a good prospect for a habitable world.

What the HIP99770 system does offer is an analogy to our own solar system. It has a cold debris disk of ice and rock far out from the star, akin to a scaled-up version of the Kuiper Belt in our solar system.

The main difference is that the HIP99770 system is dominated by one high-mass planet, rather than several smaller ones.

Images of the HIP99770 system, taken with exoplanet imager SCExAO (Subaru Coronagraphic Extreme Adaptive Optics Project) coupled with data from the CHARIS instrument (Coronagraphic High-Resolution Imager and Spectrograph). Author provided

We reached our findings by first detecting hints of a planet via indirect detection methods. We noticed the star was wobbling in space, which hinted at the presence of a planet in the vicinity with a large gravitational pull.

This motivated our direct imaging efforts; we were no longer searching in the dark.

The extra data came from the European Space Agencys Gaia spacecraft, which has been measuring the positions of nearly one billion stars since 2014. Gaia is sensitive enough to detect tiny variations of a stars motion through space, such as those caused by planets.

We also supplemented these data with measurements from Gaias predecessor, Hipparcos. In total, we had 25 years worth of astrometric (positional) data to work with.

Previously, researchers have used indirect methods to guide imaging that has discovered companion stars, but not planets.

Its not their fault: massive stars such as HIP99770which is almost twice the mass of our sunare reluctant to give up their secrets. Otherwise-successful search techniques can rarely reach the levels of precision required to detect planets around such massive stars.

Our detection, which used both direct imaging and astrometry, demonstrates a more efficient way to search for planets. Its the first time the direct detection of an exoplanet has been guided through initial indirect detection methods.

Gaia is expected to continue observing until at least 2025, and its archive will remain useful for decades to come.

Astrometry of HIP99770 suggests it belongs to the Argus association of starsa group of stars that moves together through space. This would suggest the system is rather young, about 40 million years old. That would make it roughly one-hundredth of the age of our solar system.

However, our analysis of the stars pulsations, as well as models of the planets brightness, suggest an older age of between 120 million and 200 million years. If this is the case, HIP99770 might just be an interloper in the Argus group.

Now that its known to host a planet, astronomers will aim to further unravel the mysteries of HIP99770 and its immediate environment.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Image Credit: Subaru Telescope image of HIP99770. T. Currie/Subaru Telescope, UTSA

Original post:

Astronomers Just Directly Imaged a Massive Exoplanet. Here's Why ... - Singularity Hub